Category Archives: Politically Incorrect

Eternity is committed to publishing a wide range of viewpoints from within orthodox Christianity, and here is an example. In this opinion piece, Greg Bondar the NSW/ACT Director of Family Voice, and a former Ministerial Senior Adviser in the first term of the Howard Government points to positive developments made by the Trump Administration. While we have published extensively on a major failure of the Trump administration the Capitol riot this opinion piece sets out a case that Trump did some good things. It is clearly not intended as a balanced assessment of the good and bad of the entire Trump era. John Sandeman

Welcome Mr Biden, Farewell Mr Trump.

Joe Biden, now the 46th president of the US, delivered a solemn inaugural address on Wednesday, 20 January. Mr Biden made a plea for unity and called to end this uncivil war, adding that democracy has prevailed. He said unity is the path forward in his inaugural address. Really?

This is nothing short of hypocrisy. Where was the call from Mr Biden for unity when Donald Trump was president, when BLM rioters burned buildings, when Big Tech took away free speech from Trump, and when there was unjust and relentless political and personal persecution by the media of both Trump and his government? [Note: Reuters fact check shows that Biden did condemn violence}

As a conservative Christian, and to my political recollection, no president in recent memory including Ronald Reagan has done as much to defend innocent unborn children as President Trump. And no president in recent memory has done as much to defend our freedoms of speech and religion as President Trump. Promises made, promises kept.

On the issue of Life, President Trump has accomplished the following among many others:

Appointed three Supreme Court justices, including Amy Coney Barrett, Brett Kavanaugh, and Neil Gorsuch, who all appear to hold pro-life values.

Reinstituted the Mexico City Policy preventing American aid from funding abortion and the promotion of abortion, and

Signed legislation to empower states to defund Planned Parenthood.

On the issues of faith and freedom, President Trump has:

Lifted the Obama administrations contraception mandate that required religious employers, such as the Little Sisters of the Poor, to participate in the provision of contraceptives and abortifacients, and

Issued an Executive Order on Promoting Free Speech and Religious Liberty, granting churches more freedom to speak about political issues and elections.

So many conservatives are now thanking President Trump for fighting hard to defend life, faith and freedom. His legacy will live on long after he has left office, and Christians should applaud his courage and foresight to fight for these most vital of moral issues.

Christians should also reflect and acknowledge President Trump for doing his best, despite opposition from the media and the Democrats, to protect life, faith and freedom over the last four years.

So, why and how did the USA elect the wrong person both in 1976 and again in 2020? The exact reason for this was the focused public voter reaction on a single and very specific set of circumstances, rather than as an endorsement of a generalised political agenda.

Specifically, in 1976, it was the collective negative reaction to the Watergate scandal, the resignation of Richard Nixon and Gerald Fords pardon of Nixon. The earlier resignation of Nixons Vice President Spiro Agnew as part of a separate scandal also contributed. Result? A single negative issue set, and Mr. Carter was elected.

In 2020, USA was and still is amid a pandemic that has killed millions worldwide and hundreds of thousands of Americans. As such, it was understandably the most central and single significant issue of the election, and it alone, primarily, determined its outcome ergo Mr. Biden.

Doubt this? Just consider this very specific question: Had there been no COVID-19 pandemic none at all who would have won the 2020 election? Answer: Donald Trump by a huge landslide, as he was the architect of the most significant short-term economic prosperity in USAs recent history; the media failed to report this (deliberately) and still refuses to acknowledge.

After the election, Trump delivered.

The reality of Trumps economic wins include improved employment and income statistics for all aspects and sectors of the economy especially workers and more especially women, African Americans, Hispanics, Asians, and the other measurable demographic groups.

So, what about spiritual politics, given the end of the pro-Christian presidency of Donald Trump? No president in American history has so overtly devoted himself to appealing to evangelical Christians as Trump but it wasnt enough. In the iconography of Trumps presidency, the place of religion can be captured in two photographs. Theres the one of him hefting a Bible in front of St. Johns Episcopal Church across Lafayette Park from the White House, during the George Floyd protests on June 1, 2020. Then theres the images of Jesus 2020 and similar banners waved during what has been called Insurrection Day, January 6, 2021.

To repeat, no president in American history has so overtly, by word and by deed, devoted himself to appealing to evangelical Christians as Trump. And never have Christians that is, the subset hes assiduously appealed to responded with such devotion.

We identify that subset as white evangelicals who constitute a quarter of the national electorate and who vote Republican by margins of 3 or 4-to-1, according to election surveys. But its important to understand that the surveys do not create this religious grouping by identifying and collecting people according to their evangelical denominations Baptists, Pentecostals, and the like and grouping them with non-denominational Christians who, by and large, belong in the evangelical fold. They simply cross-tabulate those who say theyre white and those who say theyre evangelical or born again.

These days, research from Christianity Today says that 40 per cent of mainline Protestants and 28 per ent of Catholics say theyre born again. In other words, a lot of evangelical Christians are not evangelicals in the way religious scholars or, even, many laypeople understand the term. A more accurate term for white evangelicals as a political bloc would be white conservative Christians. Which is not to say that Trump didnt focus most of his attention on actual evangelicals.

This points to a central tragedy in American life racial division. Black Christians (in the polling, Black Christians appear as one group, but are largely evangelical in belief) voted Biden by a large margin. There is a good deal of mutual incomprehension between these two groups regarding their politics. There is not one evangelical Christian agenda in the US.

Trump proclaimed himself pro-life and said hed appoint justices who would overturn the Supreme Courts Roe v. Wade abortion decision.

He also appointed an evangelical advisory board comprising 25 prominent pastors and political operatives on the religious right. So, despite Trumps obvious moral shortcomings and lack of personal piety (personal view), white evangelicals turned out in droves and gave him 80 per cent of their vote as high a proportion as theyd ever given a presidential candidate.

After the election, Trump delivered. He reinstated the so-calledMexico City policy, barring federal funding for international family planning agencies that so much as discussed abortion. Going beyond previous Republican presidents, he extended the policy to cover all global health organisations.

Trump embraced religious conservatives maximalist religious liberty campaign

Keeping his promises from the campaign trail, he banned travel from several majority-Muslim countries in a series of executive orders ultimately upheld by the Supreme Court. He appointed three Supreme Court justices who seemed disposed to overturn Roe v. Wade. He relocated the US Embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem and abandoned long-standing US opposition to Israeli settlements on the West Bank more to appeal to evangelicals than to American Jews.

Uninterested in the substance of the Bush-Obama faith-based initiative, hereversedformer President Barack Obamas requirement that government-funded religious social service providers refer to alternative providers clients who requested it.

Trump embraced religious conservatives maximalist religious liberty campaign,allowing employers with religious or moral objectionsto be exempt from the Affordable Care Acts mandate to provide women with contraceptive services. After the COVID-19 pandemic hit,he demandedthat governors cease restricting in-person religious services.

To be fair, these actions were not designed solely for evangelicals. The anti-abortion and religious liberty measures also had a specifically Catholic audience in mind. Lest they miss the point, Trump visited the St. John Paul II Shrine in Washington one day after hefting the Bible in front of St. Johns Episcopal. Trumps unstinting appeal to white conservative Christians created a degree of religious enthusiasm that was unprecedented in American political history, as suggested by the display of Christian symbols and prayer outside and inside the Capitol on January 6.

But in the end, it wasnt enough.

According to this years problematic exit polling, his support among white evangelicals dropped to 76 per cent (CNN Politics), even as their proportion of the total vote rose from 26 per cent to 28% per cent.

At best, Trumps pro-Christian presidency at most enabled white conservative Christians to hold their own in the biggest election turnout in a century. However, its largest impact was on those most removed from the Christian agenda, whose turnout in support of Biden it boosted enormously.

As for Biden, I am predicting he will fail, and voters will quickly realise that they screwed up given that the now President is a consummate self-promoter a view even held by some Democrats. This is not a dire prediction because the USA will recover from Joe Bidens more generalised failure as a president, but it could be quite a painful process for the USA to get back on the political track they had become very comfortable with.

The reason Mr. Biden will fail so soon is that many more millions who voted for him will realise and quickly that they made a mistake, a political mea culpa. In some ways, it will be a similar reaction to the election of Jimmy Carter in 1976, when many of his voters quickly realised they had screwed up.

As for Mr Bidens hypocrisy to call for unity, we should at least refer to Biblical guidance. Pauls word to the conflicted Corinthian congregation is Gods word to us today: I appeal to you, brothers, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree, and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be united in the same mind and the same judgment. (1 Corinthians 1:10)

When we have the same mind and the same judgment, we can heal our divisions and face our future with hope. Let us pray and hope Americans work to this end for the glory of our Lord, not merely for the glory of Mr Biden.

Greg Bondar serves as the NSW/ACT State Director of FamilyVoice Australia. He has been working as a Senior Executive within the not-for-profit, government, and vorporate sector for more than 30 years. Greg was formerly the Federal and NSW State Director for the Christian Democratic Party of Australia (Fred Nile Group), where he oversaw the 2016 federal elections and various by-elections. He was also a Senior Adviser to the Minister for Transport and Regional Development in the first term of the Howard Government.

Why not send this to a friend?

Share

Read more from the original source:
Politically incorrect: Trumps achievements on faith and freedom - Eternity News

Last night marked the 18th anniversary ofJimmy Kimmel Live!and while there wasnt much fanfare, the late night show did look back at some of its earliest monologue jokes.

It had been some time since ABC tried a traditional late night show when Jimmy Kimmel started in 2003. Kimmels show replaced Bill MahersPolitically Incorrect in a move that ultimately worked out well for both parties.

Kimmel didnt exactly come racing out of the gates, however. The show struggled to compete and the live aspect became too much of a burden both for ABC and the show. But eventually,Jimmy Kimmel Live!found its footing and is now considered among the best late night shows on television.

Last night on the show, Kimmel opened his monologue by marking the occasion. Rather than show a highlight package or montage, the comedian looked back at his very first jokes about Donald Trump and Joe Biden.

A Donald Trump hair joke isnt exactly the most creative bit of humor, even in 2004. But even back then, Kimmel knew it was a throwaway line. The comedian probably wouldnt have guessed that it would be played again on the shows 18th anniversary. Kimmel has certainly come a long way in his insults towards now-former President Donald Trump.

The Joe Biden joke from 2008 marked an improvement in the monologue writing. And of course, we know that Obama-Biden would be the combination that eventually took out Osama bin Laden, adding another layer to Kimmels joke.

Now in 2021, Kimmels political punchlines are among late night TVs best. Millions of fans tuned in to see his reaction to every Trump tweet, scandal, and controversy.

But maybe the funniest part about Kimmels trip down memory lane was revisiting his look from the early days of the show. It certainly entertained Guillermo who may be in for some revenge for laughing at his boss. Tonights show should celebrate the sidekicks 50th birthday.

What has been your favorite moment from Jimmy Kimmel over the past 18 years? Share your thoughts in the comment section below.

See the rest here:
Jimmy Kimmel Live celebrates 18th anniversary with throwback monologue - Last Night On

The Politically Incorrect Guide, a project ofDangerous Documentariesand the Capital Research Center, kicked off this morning,releasingits first episode, The Politically Incorrect Guide to the Constitution.

Podcasters and authorsTom Woods andMichael Malice have created an ingenious prescription to heal the sickness of misinformation rampant throughout the country: an animated webseries that educates viewers beyond the politically correct rhetoric increasingly infecting American universities and society at large.

Based on theRegnery book seriesof the same name, each episode will cover stories from history, culture, and social movements that students in todays mainstream education system may never hear, but need to know. The book series contains 32 works, each written by a different expert, includingThe Politically Incorrect Guide toCommunismandThePolitically Incorrect Guide to Capitalism, both of which will be among the shows upcoming episodes.

We are extremely excited to adapt this highly regarded, best-selling book series for animation. We are equally excited to work with Tom and Michael, both of whom have spent their careers shredding the 3 by 5 index card of allowable opinion, Klein says. At this time of heightening political correctness, particularly in the entertainment industry, we believe there is deep desire for entertainment that tells it how it is. Tom & Michaels deep knowledge and humor make them well positioned to fulfill that desire.

Season one is 10 episodes long, each episode lasting 12 to 15 minutes and releasing throughout 2021. The show will educate people on true but politically incorrect facts, says Joseph (Jake) Klein, series producer and founder of Dangerous Documentaries.

Be sure to check out the show andDangerous Documentaries work on social media.

Stay updated on The Politically Incorrect Guide atPIGseries.com.

Read the original post:
The Politically Incorrect Guide: The New Animated Webseries - Capital Research Center

"But what I am afraid of is that this positive promotion of a way of life. This is what is happening here now. They are saying that people should actively promote homosexuality, that you should try. It is not necessary that you should try. There are certain things which are bad. That you needn't try. Just accept that it is bad. We are not made that way.

Dr Mahathir Mohamad on homosexuality, 2001

COMMENT | Prime Minister Muhyiddin Yassins suggestion that Asean formulates policies that curb free speech on digital platforms in the guise of curbing hate speech has been called out for being hypocritical.

Hate speech has not been normalised in this country. To make such a claim, we have to point to sources which demonstrate how such speech at one time was considered anathema. The reality is that hate speech has always been the vulgar political and religious expressions of the state. Whether doctrinal or legislative, such speech was merely the expression of state actions.

When it comes to racial or religious issues, the state has always either through legislation or political norms, endorsed hate speech as a means to reflect the racial and religious superiority of the majority but more importantly, has been accepted by mainstream political operatives as the realpolitik of this country instead of something to be raged against...

See the rest here:
COMMENT | Hate speech is the politically incorrect expression of mainstream M'sian politics - Malaysiakini

(Photo: Getty Images)

Ralph Fiennes definitely has range. After winning Oscar nominations for his deeply serious early roles in Schindler's List and The English Patient, he's often subverted our expectations by playing everything from In Bruges' potty-mouthed mob boss to The Grand Budapest Hotel's camp concierge. And who can forget his villainous performance as Lord Voldermort in the Harry Potter movies?

In his latest film The Dig, which premieres on Netflix Friday (January 29), he plays Basil Brown, a self-taught British archaeologist who spearheaded one of the most important discoveries of all time. To whet your appetite, here are some things you might not know about the darn fine Ralph Fiennes.

1. His full name is Ralph Nathaniel Twisleton-Wykeham-Fiennes.

And Ralph is pronounced "Rafe" to rhyme with "safe."

2. He comes from an illustrious family.

His paternal grandfather Sir Maurice Fiennes was an industrialist who was knighted for services to British engineering, while his maternal grandfather Brigadier Henry Alleyne Lash was a prominent officer in the British Indian army.

He's also related to explorer Sir Ranulph Fiennes, his third cousin once-removed, who in 1993 became the first person to cross Antarctica completely on foot. Oh, and you surely know his brother Joseph Fiennes, a fellow actor famous for Shakespeare in Love and The Handmaid's Tale.

But, did you know that the actor who plays Tom Riddle a.k.a. young Voldemort in Harry and the Half-Blood Prince is actually Fiennes nephew Hero Fiennes-Tiffin?!

3. He's the eldest of six siblings and grew up between England and Ireland.

"We struggled financially and grew up with the refrain that we had a big overdraft," Fiennes told The Times in 2018. "We had food, but it was often packets of soup and mashed potato. My father was a farmer who became a photographer. My mother was a writer. I think my love of the theatre comes from her and my approach to work from him. He loved using his hands and was very gifted at building shelves and things. He trained me in painting and decorating, how to replace a sash window and so on."

4. He rarely discusses his private life and respect to him for that.

But we do know that he was married to Doctor Who favorite Alex Kingston from 1993 to 1997. The two actors met while studying at London's Royal Academy of Dramatic Art and dated for around a decade before tying the knot.

5. He's had honorary Serbian citizenship since 2017.

His agent Simon Beresford told The Hollywood Reporter that year that Fiennes remains a British citizen, but has "gracefully accepted the honor bestowed on him by the Serbian people in gratitude and appreciation of the work he has done in Serbia over a number of years."

Fiennes shot both films he's directed, 2011's Coriolanus and 2018's The White Crow, in Serbia.

6. Long before he joined the Bond franchise as M, he was briefly in the running for the title role.

"There was a discussion, once, some years ago, about my playing 007," he told The Guardian in 2019. "I don't think I would have been very good, but I did feel that I could have had a crack at it if it had been set in the 1950s. I love the books and I always saw them in black and white, gritty, noirish and very dangerous. And probably very politically incorrect!"

7. The role he found the hardest to play was... J-Lo's love interest Maid in Manhattan.

"The truth is I found it really hard playing the young Republican senator in Maid in Manhattan," Fiennes told The Guardian. "I was flattered to be asked to play opposite J-Lo. But quickly realized that my Prince Charming role didnt have much grit. It amused me to read that in a recent Guardian breakdown of J-Los films it was considered that Id let down the film by coming across as a serial killer."

8. He suffers from "huge anxiety attacks."

"I'll wake up early in the morning with my brain anxious about something and I don't even know what it is, just a general sense of profound uncertainty," Fiennes told Esquire in 2014. "It's from the unconscious, I suppose, fears about existence. A weird twilight panic. We feel we can organize our lives and have an order that we can control but really we can't; it's always paper-thin and underneath there's this lurking chaos. You think, 'F**k! This could come at me at any moment.'"

9. He nearly turned down his iconic role as Lord Voldemort in Harry Potter.

"The truth is I was actually ignorant about the films and the books," Fiennes admitted during a 2019 interview on The Jonathan Ross Show. "I was approached by the production. Mike Newell was directing the film that they wanted me to be in... the first time Voldemort was going to appear physically. Out of ignorance I just sort of thought, this isnt for me. Quite stupidly I resisted, I was hesitant."

Fiennes then explained that he has his role as an uncle to thank for his eventual decision to accept the villainous part, saying: "I think the clincher was that my sister Martha who has three children who were then probably about 12, 10 and 8 she said, 'What do you mean? Youve got to do it!' So then I rewound my thinking."

10. Oh, and he wore a rather surprising garment under his robe when he played Voldemort.

Fiennes shared his sartorial secret during a 2016 appearance on The Graham Norton Show, which you can relive below.

Do you have a favorite Ralph Fiennes performance?

Read more from the original source:
10 Things You Never Knew About Ralph Fiennes | Anglophenia - Anglophenia

Its going to be a rollercoaster, but dont worry: it has a happy ending.

Its easy to show and explain that messianic synagogues are just churches where Jesus is reigning with a sauce of Jewish words and customs. That isnt only fake Judaism and falsehood. (How can one promote falsehood and claim to believe in G^d?!) But when we look at the differences between the Orthodox and the non-Orthodox, things are much less clear.

Although no question is taboo in Judaism, the above one is so politically incorrect that, rather than looking for answers, most people may tend to just say that its s proof of disrespect and forbidden to ask.

One could counter that Reform and Conservative and Reconstructionist and Humanist Judaism are new and that everyone knows that all the shades of Orthodox Judaism only are continuations of historic Judaism.

However, Judaism always changed, over the ages, so why would the changes that happened in the last one-and-a-half century be deemed unworthy of being part of the Judaism of millennia?

One could say that it is a bridge too far to do away with the separation between the mens and the womens section, question the Divinity of the Torah, to let the public vote on what Jewish Law should prescribe, to abandon exclusively maternal lineage, and to reject the Supernatural, etc.

Those are radical departures of the past, but weve been there before. Debates on biggies, like if theres a future world, resurrection, or free will.

That is true, but the groups that held that these dont exist, discontinued to be part of the Jewish Tradition. They may have meant well and have been sincere and honest and noble and holy. But not Jewish, in hindsight.

For now, we cant tell which part(s) of Judaism have the future. So, that cannot be an argument to disqualify any specific way. Maybe Pluralism will win out. Maybe Purification will. Maybe neither. Prediction is hard, especially concerning the future. Moses didnt even recognize the Judaism of Rabbi Akiva, the pillar of all Judaism we have today.

But, there is still a difference if you build on old Judaism or if you take modernity and give it a Jewish veneer.

Thats what you say about the non-Orthodoxy. But the great Maimonides adjusted Greek Philosophy to fit Judaism. His books were burned and his name was shunned, until it was discovered that he did not compromise Judaism at all. Same with Chassidut. Same with so many Jewish renewals.

Still, we dont let anyone just invent his own lifestyle and philosophy and claim it to be a legit brand of Judaism. Not only would that be the end of a distinguishable Jewish People but it would also guarantee that every religious Jew began his own Judaism without any common denominator.

But, anti-Semites dont distingue between the present different Jewish streams. They equally hate all of them.

Oh, thats true. This is a serious argument, sadly so. Theyre often the first and best in finding out whos Jewish (for the wrong reasons, obviously).

However, all of the above mess might be the result of the tough situation that Jews found themselves in in the Germanic countries. Every tiny mistake could unleash a mass murder on the small communities, and those Jews became terribly over-precise. A strictness that never was part of Judaism. Then, it can be called a sign of assimilation. Non-Ashkenazic Jews dont separate their communities into Reform, Orthodox, etc.

So, all of the above may be solved when the majority of Jews, the non-Ashkenazic Jews, will take the lead in shepherding the Jewish People.

MM is a prolific and creative writer and thinker, a daily blog contributor to the TOI. He is a fetal survivor of the pharmaceutical industry (https://diethylstilbestrol.co.uk/studies/des-and-psychological-health/), born in 1953 to two Dutch survivors who met in the largest concentration camp in the Netherlands, Westerbork, and holds a BA in medicine (University of Amsterdam). He taught Re-evaluation Co-counseling, became a social activist, became religious, made Aliyah, and raised three wonderful kids. He wrote an unpublished tome about Jewish Free Will. He's a strict vegan since 2008. He's an Orthodox Jew but not a rabbi. * His most influential teachers (chronologically) are: his parents, Nico (natan) van Zuiden and Betty (beisye) Nieweg, Wim Kan, Mozart, Harvey Jackins, Marshal Rosenberg, Reb Shlomo Carlebach, and, lehavdil bein chayim lechayim: Rabbi Dr. Natan Lopes Cardozo, Rav Zev Leff, and Rav Meir Lubin. * Previously, for decades, he was known to the Jerusalem Post readers as a frequent letter writer. For a couple of years, he wrote hasbara for the Dutch public. His fields of attention now are varied: Psychology (including Sexuality and Abuse), Medicine (including physical immortality), Science (statistics), Politics (Israel, the US and the Netherlands, Activism - more than leftwing or rightwing, he hopes to highlight Truth), Oppression and Liberation (intersectionally, for young people, the elderly, non-Whites, women, workers, Jews, LGBTQIA, foreigners and anyone else who's dehumanized or exploited), Integrity, Philosophy, Jews (Judaism, Zionism, Holocaust and Jewish Liberation), Ecology and Veganism. Sometimes he's misunderstood because he has such a wide vision that never fits any specialist's box. But that's exactly what many love about him. Many of his posts relate to affairs from the news or the Torah Portion of the Week or are new insights that suddenly befell him. * He hopes that his words will inspire and inform, reassure the doubters but make the self-assured doubt more. He strives to bring a fresh perspective rather than bore you with the obvious. He doesn't expect his readers to agree. Rather, original minds must be disputed. In short, his main political positions are: anti-Trumpism, for Zionism, Intersectionality, non-violence, democracy, anti the fake peace process, for original-Orthodoxy, Science, Free Will, anti blaming-the-victim and for down-to-earth optimism. Read his blog how he attempts to bridge any discrepancies. He admits sometimes exaggerating to make a point, which could have him come across as nasty, while in actuality, he's quite a lovely person to interact with. He holds - how Dutch - that a strong opinion doesn't imply intolerance of other views. * His writing has been made possible by an allowance for second-generation Holocaust survivors from the Netherlands. It has been his dream since he was 38 to try to make a difference by teaching through writing. He had three times 9-out-of-10 for Dutch at his high school finals but is spending his days communicating in English and Hebrew - how ironic. G-d must have a fine sense of humor. In case you wonder - yes, he is a bit dyslectic. November 13, 2018, he published his 500th blog post with the ToI. If you're a native English speaker and wonder why you should read from people whose English is only their second language, consider the advantage of having a peek outside of your cultural bubble. * To find his earlier blog posts on a certain subject XXX, among his over 1200 ones, go to the right-top corner of the Times of Israel page, click on the search icon and search "zuiden, XXX". His second daily active less tame blog, to which one may subscribe, one may find here: https://mmvanzuiden.wordpress.com/ or by clicking on the globe icon next to his picture on top. * To send any personal reaction to him, scroll to the top of the blog post and click Contact Me.

Link:
Are Reform and Conservative Judaism misappropriating traditional Judaism? | Moshe-Mordechai van Zuiden | The Blogs - The Times of Israel

With audio descriptions provided by narrator Toni Green, this concept album might as well have been a radio musical. Set roughly between the late 1930s and the late 1940s (the earliest date explicitly stated is 29 March 1939, and the narrative ends at a point where Israel had been established as a nation-state), the show is set in Birobidzhan, in Siberia. Birobidzhan remains the capital of the Jewish Autonomous Oblast, ostensibly set up so the USSR could claim tolerance towards Jews. But, as this show highlights, even the slightest hint of dissidence against the state results in a lengthy jail term.

Two families in particular are focused on. Iser Liebermann (Sam Young), his wife Mirele (Kate Radmilovic) and their daughter Zofia (Kimberley Blake), a wireless broadcaster, are from Ukraine.

Oskar Levin (John Ellis), his son David (Joseph Claus) and his daughter Bayla (Michaela Stern) are from sunny California. The long and the short of it appears to be that Oskar hates his ex-wife so much he would rather relocate to Siberia than have anything to do with her in the United States. Each to their own and all that.

No prior knowledge of the era in which the show is set is required as sufficient context is provided. Having as much explanation as is provided may be somewhat trying for someone who does know about this period of history, but that doesnt take anything away from how accessible this production is. The show provides an outside looking in perspective on Soviet living, and isnt exactly kind to the USSR, portraying it as a fretful country where everyone spies on everyone else and submits regular reports to the authorities. The Soviet Union is, mind you, where the term politically incorrect came from. Used in its original context, your friends may agree with you about something, and deem you factually correct but politically incorrect, because what youve said is not the official standpoint of the government, and would therefore, if someone were to snitch on you, result in immediate and indefinite imprisonment without trial.

The style and tempo of the music suits the hostile environment. This isnt exactly 42nd Street, and it takes a while to get drawn into the narrative. Some themes and subject matters explored are familiar to fans and followers of musical theatre, such as intergenerational conflict, sibling rivalries, the power of love, and the dilemmas characters must face at pivotal moments, expressed (of course) through song. The show verges on melodrama on occasion, and some of it, frankly, is as predictable as night follows day. Theres the steely determination that one character has when another one wants to throw in the towel. And people are falling in (and out) of love with each other.

For some, the litmus test is whether the melodies are memorable. There isnt a tune that sticks in the mind for me. It is a demanding score to navigate, and the cast does well to belt out the long, big notes (and there are quite a few of them throughout). Im not the biggest fan of synthesizers, and theyre overused here. The production manages a credible hopeful ending, and by the end, I was sufficiently invested in the shows characters that it was almost a pity there wasnt a postscript to summarise what happened to them in the years and decades after the events portrayed.

Its not a wholly watertight musical. Some of the accents need tightening, for instance, and Im not sure what Yenta (Toni Green) does all day other than worry and complain. Its also slightly surprising that its not until some way into the second half that someone anyone in a religious community utters a prayer. Overall, though, its a bold and sincere musical work, which doesnt sugar-coat the sheer reality of the complications and risks involved in starting a new life.

Review by Chris Omaweng

Set on the brink of war, SOVIET ZION is about an American family and a European family who each move to Siberia as pioneers, participating in the real-life endeavour to create there a Yiddish-speaking, socialist utopia. The stories of a spoilt girl from Malibu who must adjust to her new Siberian life intertwine with those of a woman who, manipulated into betraying the man she loves, must strategize her every move. How can they escape? And where can they call home?

The rest is here:
Soviet Zion Concept Album | Review - London Theatre 1

These days it has become a common invective to denounce particular popular actions as political or politicised in order to delegitimise them. This is a tactic that has traditionally been employed by all ruling parties in Indias political history, but has become an especially handy tool for the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and its supporters within the media and public.

The allegation of politically motivated currently being hurled at the farmers protests fomenting around Delhi as well as other parts of the country is the most recent example of the same. This is just the latest use of the bogey in the last 12 months.

It has previously been used to, among other things, attack the anti-Citizenship Amendment Act protesters, the raising of concerns about stranded migrant labourers being charged for being ferried by the railways to their homes during the lockdown, the opposition to the conduct of NEET and JEE exams amidst the pandemic, the questioning of the Union governments response to border incursions by China, and the protests against the shocking ill-treatment of the gang-rape victims family in Uttar Pradeshs Hathras.

The question that begs to be asked is: what is this politicisation, and is it indeed a bad thing?

Politics is serious matter

Politics is not just the domain of political parties contesting and competing with each other in elections. Understood holistically, the term refers to all the activities associated with the governance of a country, especially (but not limited to) the contestation of power among political parties, as well as deciding how that power to govern is wielded. It is reductive to treat politics simply as a horse race, a pro-wrestling match, a who will be the next PM/CM reality show, or BJP versus INC/AAP/TMC.

Politics affects all of our lives, especially those of our fellow citizens who rely on the State for their material needs. This is why if something significantly affects the lives of citizens and is either ignored or not sufficiently dealt with by the State, it must be politicised.

This need for politicisation through participation in the political process is sanctioned by the Constitution of India, not only through the right to participate in elections through voting in and contesting them, but also through the fundamental right to assemble peaceably and without arms, to form associations and unions, and to move freely throughout the territory of India.

Also read: Success of Farmers Protest Renews Hope in the Politics of Mass Mobilisation

This is why anyone can form a political party; indeed, we have thousands of political parties across the country. It wouldnt be incorrect to hold that our constitutional and legal framework provides every citizen with the freedom to hold political thoughts, and to participate in political activities.

It is, therefore, quite puzzling, then, that political parties are derided for doing politics or politicising public concerns and issues. Is that not their raison detre? Every single party is guilty of it, especially during election campaigns, so why does it become a pejorative only when someone opposes the governments narrative and raises uncomfortable questions?

People, including members of opposition parties, gather in central Delhi for a protest against the governments decision to withdraw Rs 500 and Rs 1000 banknotes from circulation, November 28, 2016. Credit: Reuters/Cathal McNaughton

Good politics versus bad politics

A distinction must be drawn, then, between good politics and bad politics. As outlined by professor Sadanand Shahi in an editorial in Hindustan, bad politics is of the kind that attempts to disengage the citizenry from politics by making them apolitical. This is precisely because an apolitical citizenry can easily be convinced that politics is sleazy territory to be stayed away from.

Such citizens get conditioned not to expect or demand better governance from their political representatives or the State that improve their lives, and can consequently be swayed by narrow identitarian or parochial concerns that invoke passion but ultimately have no impact on their material living conditions.

Such bad politics is evident, for instance, in the politicisation of the gotra or religion of a prominent politician, the unfortunate suicide of a Bollywood actor, and the rabble rousing over marriages between Muslim men and Hindu women.

Conversely, good politics is the kind that articulates legitimate public grievances, and policy issues that have a bearing on the public good.

This is why every government decision that impacts lives detrimentally must be contested, and Opposition parties must challenge those decisions in the political domain. After all, that is how government policy improves in the first place, through the exertion of popular pressure.

Even seen from the prism of cold electoral logic, it makes sense for Opposition political parties to politicise citizens unrest and differences with the government: Different political parties are supposed to represent distinct and diverse ideologies and political stances, and Opposition parties must organise and canvas support for positions on which they diverge with the government in order to set themselves apart and hope to win votes at the next election.

After all, if every Opposition party goes along with the governments narrative and doesnt stand with citizens when they voice differences with the governments policies, then why would citizens vote for them?

In fact, if the Opposition can be faulted for something, it is that they dont politicise enough matters of government failures crushing citizens lives, be it, for instance, the unchecked police brutality against citizens, the non-payment of salaries for several months to teachers and doctors, the resistance towards ASHA workers demand to be paid at least a minimum wage, the unemployment crisis that has enveloped the country for the last few years but has especially exacerbated due to the twin blow of the pandemic and the national lockdown, the central governments failed response to the pandemic which has caused untold avoidable deaths and heaped misery on so many more people, and the education deficit being faced by students who cannot go to schools and are outside the limited privileged circle of those who can afford schooling via smart tech devices.

Also read: Why Todays India Needs a Resurrected Swatantra Party

These are issues that affect voters lives, and will find more resonance with public as opposed to petty bickering over a politician being asked to leave government accommodation that she doesnt even need, or shameful resort politics of the sort we have seen in Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan since the pandemic took root in India.

After all, in a democracy, politicians work for us, and have an obligation to explain themselves and answer our questions. Whats wrong with an Opposition party member or, indeed, a citizen, posing those questions and asking for information? Pointing out flaws in the policies of the government of the day and providing an alternative narrative is exactly the Oppositions job!

Opposition parties protest against the handcuffing of farmers in Andhra Pradesh. Photo: Twitter/@JaiTDP

The public good must be politicised

Calls to not politicise issues are meant to divert attention from peoples legitimate demands, and reduce the governments accountability. If the Opposition is attempted to be shut out or dismissed under the canard of politicisation, be it in the parliament, in TV news channel studios or on the streets, then we are only left with the governments narrative. In a parliamentary democracy like ours, however, every party, and, by extension, every persons voice counts, not just the ruling partys. The weakening of the Opposition, therefore, by equating genuine dissent and questioning with narrow political attacks, weakens democracy.

Politicisation of trivial matters must be called out and criticised. Politicisation of peoples grievances, on the other hand, must not only be encouraged, but also expected from opposition parties, in a healthy democracy.

Vineet Bhalla is a Delhi-based lawyer.

More here:
Why Politicisation of Public Grievances Is Not the Bad Thing It Is Made Out to Be - The Wire

Another Round as it is popularly a Danish comedy-drama was praised last year. Here are some other movies like it.

Druk or Another Round as it is popularly known is a Danish comedy-drama that swept audiences and critics last year with its fresh narrative and energetic performances. Leading man Mads Mikkelsen has had his fair share of intensely dramatic roles. In Another Round, he collaborates with director Thomas Vinterberg to play a similarly flawed character, but with a certain playfulness never seen before in his filmography.

RELATED: 10 Things You Didn't Know About Mads Mikkelsen

Mikkelsen and his co-stars portray ordinary school teachers who grow dissatisfied with their mediocre lives. When one of them mentions an experiment that proposes drinking a limited amount of alcohol every day increases productivity, all of them readily agree until the side-effects start kicking in. The film is a quirky and unconventional tale on alcoholism and the after-effects it can leave on one's life and relationships.

Nicolas Cage is a household name with a plethora of mainstream films but Leaving Las Vegas might arguably be one of his lesser-known films, ironically being his only Oscar win for acting. Cage features as a down-on-luck screenwriter who is struggling with alcoholism. Giving up on life, he decides to head out to Las Vegas to drink himself to death until a sex-worker (Elisabeth Shue) offers a new perspective of life.

Researching for his role, Cage engaged in binge-drinking in Dublin, asking his friend to videotape him so that he could study his own drunk speech to get into character.

Interestingly, the aforementioned Elisabeth Shue plays a fictionalized version of herself in Hamlet 2, a film that focuses on a production of Hamlet that's intended to be a sequel to Shakespeare's classic play. The film is as random as it gets as a failed actor-turned-drama teacher (Steve Coogan) ambitiously directs a pop-culture driven, politically incorrect version of Hamlet.

Coogan perfectly represents the character's hopeless fall into alcoholism, as he needs an outlet to channel his unaccomplished dreams and to escape from his mid-life crisis. To an extent, Hamlet 2 can be seen as an R-rated variant of School of Rock.

Mary Elizabeth Winstead and Aaron Paul play a dysfunctional couple with drinking issues in the film very aptly titled Smashed. However, after Winstead's character hits rock bottom, she decides to get sober and joins an Alcoholic Anonymous group. Rather than delving into the same, old, alcoholic stereotypes, Smashed offers a fresher perspective of a woman who is willing to introspect on her past.

True to the emotional nature of director James Ponsoldt's other films (The Spectacular Now, The End of The Tour), Smashed values moving, grounded character studies instead of over-the-top dramatic caricatures, that are otherwise aplenty in films on addiction/alcoholism.

Perhaps the film that brought wine-appreciation back in fashion was an underrated gem from Netflix called Uncorked. Unlike Sideways which featured wine enthusiasts, the lead in Uncorked (Mamoudou Athie) is committed to becoming a top-class sommelier (a professional wine taster in layperson terms). But when his father wishes for him to manage his family restaurant, a conflict of interest arises.

The film is a love letter to the world of wines, while also touching on how such arenas of culture are often reserved for the elites. So, the protagonist isn't just fighting his family to come closer to his dreams, but also his own financial limitations.

Sideways is a film that actually contributed to the economics of the wine industry. When Miles (Paul Giamatti) appreciates Pinot Noir over Merlot, the sales of the former actually increased by 16% in American outlets, while Merlot's sales fell. Such has been the impact of Sideways.

RELATED: Sideways: 5 Scenes That Made Us Laugh Out Loud (& 5 That Hit Us In The Feels)

The road film deals with two friends, one of whom is getting married and hopes to engage in extramarital escapades in his journey. Meanwhile, Miles as mentioned above is just interested in tasting good wine. He's shown a failed writer and an amateur wine-taster, with his appreciation for wines serving as the only thing that offers him hope.

Several films on alcoholism depict the alcoholic character as a burden to their romantic partner. In the case of Days of Wine and Roses, the alcoholic ends up sharing his habit with his lover! Joe Clay (Jack Lemmon) is a PR man, and owing to his job, he frequently drinks with his clients. Eventually, his teetotaler girlfriend (Lee Remick) also ends up binge-drinking leading to a toxic relationship, fueled with alcoholism.

RELATED:10 Most Underrated Netflix Original Movies From The Past 5 Years

The film is adorned with chilling performances from both the leads, with Lemmon breaking typecast as he was earlier known mainly for his feel-good comedies.

While Another Round found Mads Mikkelsen merrily dancing and drinking to the fullest, Thomas Vinterberg's previous collaboration with the actor was much more serious in its nature. Mikkelsen yet again stars as a teacher in a small Danish town. One of his kindergarten students wrongly seems to think that her teacher sexually abused her. This leads to mass hysteria with the teacher being ostracized by the society around him.

The Hunt can be an uncomfortable watch for some as it doesn't offer any easy, straightforward answers. Additionally, Another Round's Thomas Bo Larsen and Lars Ranthe also appear in the film.

An overdose of anything can be lethal. So, when a wealthy yet vulnerable man ends up loathing his comfortable life, he decides to dose on a newfound lust for life. He retires from his job and leaves his wife in this process, only to go down a dark rabbit hole of drugs and unstable relationships. In the end, he faces the conflict of choosing one path in life, both of which seem extreme.

RELATED: Ben Mendelsohn's 10 Best Roles, Ranked

Yielding stunning performances by ever-reliable character actors like Ben Mendelsohn and Edie Falco, The Land of Steady Habits doubles as a case study in addiction and existentialism.

Ryan Gosling has played a charming gentleman in many a film but in Half-Nelson, he dons the guise of a disgruntled middle-school teacher with crack addiction. When one of his students (Shareeka Epps) discovers his secret, she strikes an unlikely friendship with him that ends up being oddly therapeutic.

With subtle underacting and a bittersweet exploration of human loneliness, Half-Nelson is a good-enough indie drama. It's also amusing to see a less-popular Gosling in a pretty unique role (the remnants of which could probably be seen in his performance in The Nice Guys).

Clocking at just an hour and a few minutes, the Netflix original film 6 Balloons is an intense drama that takes place over the course of one eventful night. Abbi Jacobson stars as Kate, a woman who is simply spending her day preparing for her boyfriend's birthday party. But a call from her brother Seth (Dave Franco), a drug addict, compels her to come to his aid for the rest of the film.

6 Ballons might be devoid of the visual prowess of Requiem For A Dream or the power-packed dramatics of Beautiful Boy, but still, the film succeeds at presenting a raw and real account of how addicts end up impacting their loved ones. Given a chance, Kate can leave Seth at a rehab facility and forget about him altogether, but she still keeps on looking after him like he's a naive child. Is this familial love or a toxic obligation on her? That's left open to interpretation.

NEXT: 10 Best Mads Mikkelsen Films, Ranked (According To Rotten Tomatoes)

Next Harry Potter: 10 Mistakes JK Rowling Made In The Chamber Of Secrets Book

Hailing from and based in India, Shaurya Thapa harbors interests in freelance journalism, cultural diversity, and critical analyses on films and TV of varied genres.

Excerpt from:
10 Films To Watch If You Liked Another Round | ScreenRant - Screen Rant

Ward is the executive director of the Center for Respectful Leadership. He lives in La Mesa.

During the first day of his presidency, Joe Biden conducted a virtual swearing in of a group of White House appointees over a videoconference call. He then presented them with a very stern warning: Im not joking when I say this, the 46th president of the United States said. If youre ever working with me, and I hear you treat another colleague with disrespect, talk down to someone, I promise you I will fire you on the spot. On the spot. No ifs, ands or buts. Everybody, everybody, is entitled to be treated with decency and dignity.

Wow! Essentially, President Biden is commanding a culture of respect in his administration and doing so very, very directly. Given the amount of disrespect in political and public discourse weve been seeing and hearing in the last few years, this is a breath of fresh air.

And yet its not often that leaders make such clear and unequivocal statements about respectful behavior, not to mention what will happen if people dont comply. This is because many of them dont value respect, or assume its unimportant, or dont understand how respect is a key driver of partnership, performance and productivity. This is a shame, because respect is a far more important organizational success factor than most people think.

But can you really command employees to respect each other and expect that to work? Maybe.

We provide this platform for community commentary free of charge. Thank you to all the Union-Tribune subscribers whose support makes our journalism possible. If you are not a subscriber, please consider becoming one today.

Part of creating a respectful organizational culture means ensuring that most, if not all, employees share the same definition and understanding of respect, as well as the same values and practices around decency, integrity, honesty, kindness and what are known as the three Cs: courtesy, civility and consideration.

But bringing employees to common agreement, and to a high level of understanding and practice around respect, requires education and training, collaboration and patience, trial and, yes, error. And given that the Biden administration is only a few days old, its a safe bet that these things havent happened, yet.

So President Biden appears to be jump-starting the process, by making his expectations of his appointees behaviors, and the consequences for not complying, achingly clear. This could have the desired impact, especially since the commander in chief is saying it.

But within his command to respect is a threat: if you dont comply, you lose your job. In some organizations, such a ham-fisted approach could backfire and result in everyone tiptoeing around each other on eggshells, afraid to be outed by their colleagues as politically incorrect or disrespectful. In this kind of environment, known as a too nice culture, most people wont speak their minds or give each other candid feedback, or theyll replace honest appraisal and openness with sugar-coated nuance and passive aggressiveness. The reality is a too nice culture is almost as destructive and as costly as an openly disrespectful culture.

Successful organizations are balanced. They are workplaces where respect is genuinely valued and practiced with consistency and authenticity, while at the same time they are places where people feel safe enough to argue a point passionately or call each other out on disrespectful behavior without a proverbial sword of Damocles hanging over offenders heads.

President Biden has been clear with his intentions, and hes made a good start on respect. Now he needs to ensure theres concrete training and follow up so that everyone in the Biden administration understands, values and practices respectful leadership every day.

See original here:
Opinion: President Biden's call for civility in the White House could backfire. Here's how to ensure it won't - The San Diego Union-Tribune